Carlo Caiati, Paolo Pollice, Stefano Favale, Mario Erminio Lepera
{"title":"The Herbicide Glyphosate and Its Apparently Controversial Effect on Human Health: An Updated Clinical Perspective.","authors":"Carlo Caiati, Paolo Pollice, Stefano Favale, Mario Erminio Lepera","doi":"10.2174/1871530319666191015191614","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Glyphosate (G) is the most common weed-killer in the world. Every year tons and tons of G are applied on crop fields. G was first introduced in the mid 1970s and since then its usage has gradually increased to reach a peak since 2005. Now G usage is approximately 100 -fold what it was in 1970. Its impact on human health was considered benign at the beginning. But over the years, evidence of a pervasive negative effect of this pesticide on humans has been mounting. Nonetheless, G usage is allowed by government health control agencies (both in the United States and Europe), that rely upon the evidence produced by the G producer. However, the IARC (International Agency for Research on Cancer) in 2015 has stated that G is probable carcinogenic (class 2A), the second highest class in terms of risk.</p><p><strong>Objective: </strong>In this review, we explore the effect of G on human health, focusing in particular on more recent knowledge.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>We have attempted to untangle the controversy about the dangers of the product for human beings in view of a very recent development, when the so -called Monsanto Papers, consisting of Emails and memos from Monsanto came to light, revealing a coordinated strategy to manipulate the debate about the safety of glyphosate to the company's advantage.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>The story of G is a recurrent one (see the tobacco story), that seriously jeopardizes the credibility of the scientific study in the modern era.</p>","PeriodicalId":30288,"journal":{"name":"Estudos do CEPE","volume":"1 1","pages":"489-505"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2020-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"11","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Estudos do CEPE","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.2174/1871530319666191015191614","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 11
Abstract
Background: Glyphosate (G) is the most common weed-killer in the world. Every year tons and tons of G are applied on crop fields. G was first introduced in the mid 1970s and since then its usage has gradually increased to reach a peak since 2005. Now G usage is approximately 100 -fold what it was in 1970. Its impact on human health was considered benign at the beginning. But over the years, evidence of a pervasive negative effect of this pesticide on humans has been mounting. Nonetheless, G usage is allowed by government health control agencies (both in the United States and Europe), that rely upon the evidence produced by the G producer. However, the IARC (International Agency for Research on Cancer) in 2015 has stated that G is probable carcinogenic (class 2A), the second highest class in terms of risk.
Objective: In this review, we explore the effect of G on human health, focusing in particular on more recent knowledge.
Results: We have attempted to untangle the controversy about the dangers of the product for human beings in view of a very recent development, when the so -called Monsanto Papers, consisting of Emails and memos from Monsanto came to light, revealing a coordinated strategy to manipulate the debate about the safety of glyphosate to the company's advantage.
Conclusion: The story of G is a recurrent one (see the tobacco story), that seriously jeopardizes the credibility of the scientific study in the modern era.